I am fairly new to surveying and even newer to robotic total stations. I have a couple questions regarding the PS-103 from Topcon, but probably applies to any robotic total station.
First, does anyone run a traverse in robotic mode with an ATP1 360å¡ prism? If so, how? I know the stated accuracy is supposedly the same in robotic mode sighting to a 360å¡ as it is in "manual" mode sighting a standard prism, but in my limited experience I have not found that to be the case.
Secondly, how do you set up a weighting scheme (instrument profile) in Star*Net for shots taken in Robotic Mode. By that I am again referring to the fact that in my experience the robotic sighting is less accurate than doing it manually, therefore I would be inclined to weight those observations less. The question then becomes how much less...
Thanks for your input!
I have to disagree with your statement with regards to manual sighting being more accurate than robotic. I started using robotics, or at least target tracking, in 96 or 97 when Leica came out with the 1800 series. At that point I was the R&D guy for a large regional engineering firm. At first I was skeptical of the accuracy, mainly because the cross hairs never seemed to land on the center of the target. After rigorous testing comparing manual and ATR observations on control network with ample cross ties, I was sold on ATR. Flash forward 20 years and the only time I look through the gun is for bi-weekly calibrations and rough pointing. After years of manually aiming at control points 1000 to 2000 feet away I can tell you your eyes get fatigued ant my MS50 does not have that problem.
I almost always turn angles to standard circular targets. Same as Putnam, I let the instrument point itself. I think you will find over 100s of pointings it will be more consistent and accurate. My instrument is a Trimble S6 which is the bomb, as far as I'm concerned. Sometimes I look through it and focus in and out to make sure there is no stray leaf on line which will allow it to get the shot but the angle is off a little.
I have a Leica 360 prism. I occasionally use it on a Leica style pole to turn in a found monument. It has arrows for carefully aiming it and it is just as good as the circular targets.
When we first got robotic TS's in the form of Leica 1103s, there was no way I would have the gun turn sets for me unless it was a last resort, such as in a potentially dangerous setup on a highway. I could turn them better manually back then, and we still booked our observations too. With the 1200 series it was better but I was still averse to having any machine do it for me, and booking observations was diminishing but I still did it. With the Leica Viva series, I found that it can turn better sets than my now-old eyes can do, and MUCH faster too. Booking still remains an option but it's the exception to the rule now; there are multiple methods of archiving observations (whether they can be read easily 50 years from now versus a book... hmmm... ).
So as it stands now, I do prefer the ATR versus manually cranking 'em out.
With respect to weighting observations in Star*Net: I use the factory default settings and have the software do the rest. On occasion I may tighten the settings just for kicks, but never loosen them. With the older instruments I usually biased the first angle manually since the robotics very much tended to turn the angles on the strong side.
I've done many jobs without ever looking through the eyepiece of my Leicabot. I traverse with Leica circle glass BS & Leica 360 FS. Very seldom do I see traverses with more than 1-2"/< using a 5" gun, 2 sets per staion, avg. of 3 readings/pointing. Not sure about other robots, but that Leica can outpoint this old fat man every single time, especially thru 1000' of heat shimmer.
The ATP1 Prism can be pointed in a higher accuracy way. On page 47 of the RC manual you will find a graphic demonstrating the following-
Align the hexagonally opposed points to the instrument. This will be helpful when running traverses etc. If using the 360 on a pole there are a myriad of variables that enter into the equation. If using it on a standard target set up/ tripod use the alignment hint from above. Are you running Magnet Field or a third party software?
I agree....the robot is more accurate and consistent for turning angles than manually doing it. I hardly ever look through the scope anymore unless I am taking reflectorless measurements or running the "check and adjust" calibration routine. (That's also the only time I use circular prisms anymore....the rest of the time its the 360å¡)
Dan Patterson, post: 370908, member: 1179 wrote: (That's also the only time I use circular prisms anymore....the rest of the time its the 360å¡)
And yet, there you are in your avatar ...
B-)
Warren Smith, post: 370912, member: 9900 wrote: And yet, there you are in your avatar ...
B-)
hahah....old pic
I am using a PS-103a (auto-tracking vs. "ac" auto-pointing) paired with a TESLA running MAGNET Field. Forgive me, but what eactly is the difference between auto-tracking, auto-pointing, and auto target recognition? I assume they all point ot center of target when it is in the field of view but only tracking models can follow a prism?
I noticed that the AUTO AIM setting on my instrument was set at Rapid (Not Fine) and MEAS Acc. was set to Standard (Not Advanced). Perhaps this was leading to decreased accuracy, even though the TESLA measurement settings were set to Fine? I have changed those settings and will try another sample traverse if it ever stops raining.
My previous attempt at running a traverse with the 360 prism lead to vertical errors up to .04'. I was using a single 360 prism for all shots which logistically would be a nightmare for many real world situations. Our equipment dealer lead me to believe that circular prisms could not be used with this instrument and that traverses should be done manually... granted he is not a surveyor but rather a sales/tech support/training guy. Is anyone running Traverses with the PS-103a and circular prisms?
MS SURV, post: 370917, member: 10318 wrote: I am using a PS-103a (auto-tracking vs. "ac" auto-pointing) paired with a TESLA running MAGNET Field. Forgive me, but what eactly is the difference between auto-tracking, auto-pointing, and auto target recognition? I assume they all point ot center of target when it is in the field of view but only tracking models can follow a prism?
I noticed that the AUTO AIM setting on my instrument was set at Rapid (Not Fine) and MEAS Acc. was set to Standard (Not Advanced). Perhaps this was leading to decreased accuracy, even though the TESLA measurement settings were set to Fine? I have changed those settings and will try another sample traverse if it ever stops raining.
My previous attempt at running a traverse with the 360 prism lead to vertical errors up to .04'. I was using a single 360 prism for all shots which logistically would be a nightmare for many real world situations. Our equipment dealer lead me to believe that circular prisms could not be used with this instrument and that traverses should be done manually... granted he is not a surveyor but rather a sales/tech support/training guy. Is anyone running Traverses with the PS-103a and circular prisms?
You most definitely can run a traverse with traditional can style prisms robotically . Your instrument will auto-point to a traditional prism, a reflective sheet target and the ATP1.
ATR is a marketing term another manufacturer came up with for auto-pointing.
Correct me if I am wrong but it has always been my understanding that unless a point nodal prism is used the auto pointing will never be exact to a can style prism. I don't use Leica gear so I am unfamiliar with their prism arrangements.
In my experience as a tech, I would suggest using traditional prisms for traverse work. Especially when traversing across any terrain that isn't terribly flat. A single glass will yield more consistent results. When I was running a robotic total station, I would use the 360 prisms for staking on a construction site, or topographical applications. If you are traversing, and still have a need for the instrument to "track" you, then you can still use a standard prism if you are mindful of the position of the glass.
If you are going to use a 360 prism, take care to keep one of the prism faces as close to perpendicular to the instrument as possible. The Leica 360 prisms have very handy arrows that allow you to keep this aligned. On most of the others, I typically place my finger under the glass for alignment purposes.
Top Gear Top Tip: If you are in need of tilting the prism, then you would be better served to use a tilting prism. If you need a tilting prism, the numbers support the use of the prisms that have the "nodal point offset" to avoid any further discrepancies with pointing errors.
Thank you all, I am excited to try it out and will report back the results!
.04' vertical how long are the shots. I have found our Sokkia SX which is a Topcon PS in blue to be very touchy about holding vertical through temperature changes anything over 15 degrees and I am ruining through the tilt axis and collumination routines. What are your face 1 to face 2 angle differences looking like? Also if the vertical needs to be that good it's hard to beat a digital level.
